I soved that using a single field in the document.
It's content is based on a simple convention.
Say I have 2 docs with values BirthsMarriagesDeath_Deaths_Females and
BirthsMarriagesDeath_Divorces.
Now when I need to get the total count for BirthsMarriagesDeath category, I
run "BirthsMarriages
Unfortunately, this is not an easy question to answer ... it's really
up to you to test it out for your application & production env, and
see. We certainly try very hard not to break things, but alot of
sizable changes have gone into the trunk since 2.3.
Lucene has good test case covera
Hi,
my question: How did ebay solve this problem?
Take a look to the faceted browsing in the mark twain project:
http://www.marktwainproject.org/xtf/search?keyword=Berlin&style=mtp
http://tinyurl.com/5cvb3c
This solution is open source and from the xtf project (they use lucene).
http://xtf.wiki
Do you just want to ignore them and store all in one field? If you know
the used tags previously, I guess you could set up a stop words list
with them. If not, you could do an "XMLAnalyzer" that simply ignores
everything inside '<>'...
If you want to split the xml content in separate fields, y
Dear Erick ,
Thnaks for your answer, I tryed other way , where I read the text files
before i index them. I will try also your solution here.
best regards
Erick Erickson wrote:
>
> OK, I'm finally catching on. You have to change the demo code to
> get the contents into something besides an
Hello:
Is it my imagination, or did SnowballFilter disappear from 2.3.x? I am
looking through lucene-core-2.3.0.jar and lucene-core-2.3.2.jar and
cannot find it. If so, what replaced it?
Thanks
Regards,
Eric Hamacher
**
THIS EMAIL IS INTENDED ONLY FOR
Oh, I see it's a separate distribution. Sorry!
-Original Message-
From: Eric Hamacher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 9:34 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: SnowballFilter
Hello:
Is it my imagination, or did SnowballFilter disappear from 2.3.x? I am
Can someone explain this to me?
After indexing I can see the terms I expect in the top terms using Luke but
then when I search I get no results??
This is really bizarre and is blocker for me.
Thanks.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Luke-shows-in-top-terms-but-no-search-
r u using the same analyzer, which u used for indexing, in the luke as
well?
Regards,
Aravind R Yarram
Enabling Technologies
Equifax Information Services LLC
1525 Windward Concourse, J42E
Alpharetta, GA 30005
desk: 770 740 6951
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
samd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
07/24/2008 02
This is almost certainly a coding error, and it's impossible to help without
seeing some code. Please pust:
1> your indexing code (suitably pared down)
2> your search code along with a sample query
Best
Erick
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 2:45 PM, samd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can someone expla
Hello and yes I'm using Standard in both cases.
Aravind.Yarram wrote:
>
> r u using the same analyzer, which u used for indexing, in the luke as
> well?
>
> Regards,
> Aravind R Yarram
> Enabling Technologies
> Equifax Information Services LLC
> 1525 Windward Concourse, J42E
> Alpharetta, GA
Oh and the field is not tokenized and stored.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Luke-shows-in-top-terms-but-no-search-results---tp18638011p18638323.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Indexing is done via Hibernate Search, the search I'm doing I have done in
Luke and it returns nothing. I select the field from the drop down. I type
the text which matches the top term value. No results.
Now, this isn't all fields only some fields.
Erick Erickson wrote:
>
> This is almost c
Erm.. if its not tokenized that's your problem.
You are setting up an Analyzer when indexing.. but then not actually
USING it.
Whereas when you are searching you are running your query through the
analyzer, which transforms your text in such a way that it no longer
matches against your untok
Yes that did it and thanks. The examples I have seen have shown cases where
you can specify values which aren't tokenized but yet do a search against
it. Such cases were for something where the name was unique as it is in this
case.
Now as I said before some fields have found matches which were n
Queries are very complex in our case, some have up to 100 or more clauses (over
several fields), including disjunctions and prohibited clauses. Some queries
take over 5 seconds total time on 10 million document index. I think it is
because queries are too big and complicated. Is there any sma
Hi Marcelo,
Thanks for the reply. Yes I want to ignore all the tags and store the text
in one field. Previously used tags are not known and seems the "XMLAnalyzer"
is the
solution. Anyway I think Lucene itself does not support a XMLAnalyzer. Do I
have to do it manually?
Kalani
On Thu, Jul 24, 20
Kalani Ruwanpathirana wrote:
Hi Marcelo,
Thanks for the reply. Yes I want to ignore all the tags and store the text
in one field. Previously used tags are not known and seems the "XMLAnalyzer"
is the
solution. Anyway I think Lucene itself does not support a XMLAnalyzer. Do I
have to do it manual
18 matches
Mail list logo
